@wilsonbeam/openclaw-adb-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

adb_send_sms

Initiate SMS composer on an Android device with a pre-filled recipient and message, leaving the final send action to the user.

Instructions

Open SMS composer with a pre-filled message (user must press send)

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "phoneNumber": "<phoneNumber>",
      "message": "<message>"
    },
    "name": "adb_send_sms"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`message`	Yes	SMS message content
`deviceId`	No	Target device ID (optional)
`phoneNumber`	Yes	Recipient phone number

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Aug 6, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

The description discloses the key behavior that the SMS is not sent automatically—the user must press send. This is crucial because the tool name suggests sending. However, it does not mention prerequisites like device unlock or what happens if the SMS app is missing.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence that states the action first ('Open SMS composer') followed by the key caveat. No fluff or redundant information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple tool with three parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core action and the most important behavioral caveat. However, it lacks details on prerequisites (e.g., device must be unlocked) or what the tool returns, which could be useful for an agent.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema already provides descriptions for all three parameters (phoneNumber, message, deviceId), covering 100% of the schema. The description adds no additional meaning or constraints on the parameters, so it remains at the baseline for high schema coverage.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool opens the SMS composer with a pre-filled message, using a specific verb and resource. It also clarifies that the user must press send, distinguishing it from a tool that automatically sends SMS. This differentiates it from sibling tools like adb_make_call or adb_type_text.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies the tool is for composing an SMS rather than sending it directly, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. No mention of device state (e.g., unlocked) or fallback scenarios. At best, the usage is implied from the description.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.